trousers Posted 8 June, 2011 Share Posted 8 June, 2011 Are you really sure we wrote off most our debts? I've no idea TBH. That was a quote from the Burnley forum. They were talking about us overspending, very much in the same way we criticise Pompey spending above their means. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wildgoose Posted 8 June, 2011 Share Posted 8 June, 2011 From my memory of the situation, and from reading official club statememnts at the time, the debt was 32m plus but was written off when the club went into administration and the club was bought for around 12m plus I think. We started the new era with a clean slate. There would be no debt now other than anything that might have been accrued in the last two seasons..... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matthew Le God Posted 8 June, 2011 Share Posted 8 June, 2011 From my memory of the situation, and from reading official club statememnts at the time, the debt was 32m plus but was written off when the club went into administration and the club was bought for around 12m plus I think. We started the new era with a clean slate. There would be no debt now other than anything that might have been accrued in the last two seasons..... The club made no mention of the figures in any official statement. Cortese early on did say the club was debt free. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
westofshannonsaint Posted 8 June, 2011 Share Posted 8 June, 2011 Your little black book of facts from where exactly! my memory recalled the same kind of figures, but a quick google confirmed it, http://www.dailyecho.co.uk/sport/4481187.Swiss_Saints_deal_completed/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wildgoose Posted 8 June, 2011 Share Posted 8 June, 2011 The club made no mention of the figures in any official statement. Cortese early on did say the club was debt free. Oh Okay. Thanks. I know those were the figures being mentioned somewhere.....I thought it may have been the administrator. The key bit though is the chairman saying we were debt free...... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Professor Posted 9 June, 2011 Share Posted 9 June, 2011 Cortese's privacy policy on signings has often worked, at least up to about 24 hours before the announcement and if Cork does sign for Saints we may not know for sure until the last minute. But people who have said nothing can happen while Cork is with the u-21's may be wrong as we have just heard the announcements on Phil Jones (Blackburn to MU) and Jordan Henderson (Sunderland to Liverpool) with both players being unveiled at their new clubs before flying out late for the u-21 tournament in Denmark. So it doesn't seem that Cork's involvemnnt with the u-21s need have prevented a deal, in which case maybe there is no deal, yet, or at all. The longer this goes on without a signature on a contract, the greater the chance that any potential deal could be hi-jacked. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Raging Bull Posted 9 June, 2011 Share Posted 9 June, 2011 The club was brought for £9000, the debt was different. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NickG Posted 9 June, 2011 Share Posted 9 June, 2011 Cortese's privacy policy on signings has often worked, at least up to about 24 hours before the announcement and if Cork does sign for Saints we may not know for sure until the last minute. But people who have said nothing can happen while Cork is with the u-21's may be wrong as we have just heard the announcements on Phil Jones (Blackburn to MU) and Jordan Henderson (Sunderland to Liverpool) with both players being unveiled at their new clubs before flying out late for the u-21 tournament in Denmark. So it doesn't seem that Cork's involvemnnt with the u-21s need have prevented a deal, in which case maybe there is no deal, yet, or at all. The longer this goes on without a signature on a contract, the greater the chance that any potential deal could be hi-jacked. think Jones delayed travelling with U21s Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Torres Posted 9 June, 2011 Share Posted 9 June, 2011 If you think it was right that we sacrificed our premier status just to make a point, then fine.As you were probably one of the vocal minority there are many that disagree with you. I am assuming you were one of the vocal minority by the tone of your writing. :smug::smug::smug::smug: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gemmel Posted 9 June, 2011 Share Posted 9 June, 2011 The total purchase price was somwhere in the region of 15 million as stated by the adminsitrator. During that period Andrew Surman was sold, so we can only guess that the sale price was reduced from the asking price to make it around 13 million. All creditors were paid in full* with the exception of Barclays and Aviva, who were by a country mile the lion share of the debt. Companies house lists the liquidataion, with those two creditors as "Terms agreed with the Barclays and Avia at significantly reduced rates, agreed by all parties" ... That's not the exact wording, but the general gist. As we didn't need a CVA (Due to the set up of the Holding company) I have no idea if Markus settled all other outstanding debts in full as a gesture to local businesses or if it was a pre-requiste from the FA, based on their being no CVA. * There were a number of newpaper reports at the time and thereafter that all debts were settled in full. I was very dubious as it didn't make any sense, but from what I can work out and verified on here a couple of times by creditors or relations of creditors with the exeception of the two big debts (Which must have amounted to about 99.9% of the debt) it seems as though thsi was the case. As far as wiping out all the debt, it was of course replaced with new debt through loan notes, which still stand and if taken at the word of the chairman, will ultimately be exchanged for equity or wiped out. I read the accounts (Could be wrong) as the cost to buy the club and continuing trading losses amounts to around 24 million. Which if you paid 13 million or so up front, spent a big wedge on players and then paid them big wages, would be about right..... So i guess the question is, are we worth more than 24 million here and now. If pompey really were sold for 15, then you would have to say a big fat yes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hughieslastminutegoal Posted 9 June, 2011 Share Posted 9 June, 2011 From my memory of the situation, and from reading official club statememnts at the time, the debt was 32m plus but was written off when the club went into administration and the club was bought for around 12m plus I think. We started the new era with a clean slate. There would be no debt now other than anything that might have been accrued in the last two seasons..... Were the debts written off, or were they paid either in full or in part as final settlement? A director's loan to the club to pay off those debts would not make the club debt free, would it. It might be more true to say that the owners wish the club to operate as if it was debt free. Who really knows? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hughieslastminutegoal Posted 9 June, 2011 Share Posted 9 June, 2011 The total purchase price was somwhere in the region of 15 million as stated by the adminsitrator. During that period Andrew Surman was sold, so we can only guess that the sale price was reduced from the asking price to make it around 13 million. All creditors were paid in full* with the exception of Barclays and Aviva, who were by a country mile the lion share of the debt. Companies house lists the liquidataion, with those two creditors as "Terms agreed with the Barclays and Avia at significantly reduced rates, agreed by all parties" ... That's not the exact wording, but the general gist. As we didn't need a CVA (Due to the set up of the Holding company) I have no idea if Markus settled all other outstanding debts in full as a gesture to local businesses or if it was a pre-requiste from the FA, based on their being no CVA. * There were a number of newpaper reports at the time and thereafter that all debts were settled in full. I was very dubious as it didn't make any sense, but from what I can work out and verified on here a couple of times by creditors or relations of creditors with the exeception of the two big debts (Which must have amounted to about 99.9% of the debt) it seems as though thsi was the case. As far as wiping out all the debt, it was of course replaced with new debt through loan notes, which still stand and if taken at the word of the chairman, will ultimately be exchanged for equity or wiped out. I read the accounts (Could be wrong) as the cost to buy the club and continuing trading losses amounts to around 24 million. Which if you paid 13 million or so up front, spent a big wedge on players and then paid them big wages, would be about right..... So i guess the question is, are we worth more than 24 million here and now. If pompey really were sold for 15, then you would have to say a big fat yes. In other words they will allow the club to operate as if not needing to repay the loan notes. I suppose the loan could be converted to equity as a capital injection if and when our on-field success makes it worth doing (i.e. when a prospective buyer might be prepared to pay a premium for the (extra) shares rather than just pay off the loan). I doubt very much that the loan notes will be wiped out. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
skintsaint Posted 9 June, 2011 Share Posted 9 June, 2011 Has he signed yet? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gemmel Posted 9 June, 2011 Share Posted 9 June, 2011 In other words they will allow the club to operate as if not needing to repay the loan notes. I suppose the loan could be converted to equity as a capital injection if and when our on-field success makes it worth doing (i.e. when a prospective buyer might be prepared to pay a premium for the (extra) shares rather than just pay off the loan). I doubt very much that the loan notes will be wiped out. Absolutely as I see it. And you are right - "Wiping Out" wasn't the correct terminolgy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rooney Posted 9 June, 2011 Share Posted 9 June, 2011 As far as wiping out all the debt, it was of course replaced with new debt through loan notes, which still stand and if taken at the word of the chairman, will ultimately be exchanged for equity or wiped out. I read the accounts (Could be wrong) as the cost to buy the club and continuing trading losses amounts to around 24 million. Which if you paid 13 million or so up front, spent a big wedge on players and then paid them big wages, would be about right..... So i guess the question is, are we worth more than 24 million here and now. If pompey really were sold for 15, then you would have to say a big fat yes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rooney Posted 9 June, 2011 Share Posted 9 June, 2011 Aplogies my previous reply was Gemmels and I was trying to highlight the quote. However he is not far adrift in his comment as the accounts for DMWSL 613 Ltd show Intangible and Tangible assets of £17.5m with the Loan from Markus or his company at £25M. The diffeence is probably down to player purchase and providing an element of working capital. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Andy Durman Posted 9 June, 2011 Share Posted 9 June, 2011 Considering all assets we must be work in excess of £50 million. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gordon Mockles Posted 9 June, 2011 Share Posted 9 June, 2011 OOPS! Wrong thread. Thought this one was about Jack Cork! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
derry Posted 9 June, 2011 Share Posted 9 June, 2011 (edited) The football club was always solvent and continued to operate with no financial restrictions. The Mortgage on the stadium was bought out from Aviva at an agreed rate. Ipswich did the same. The settlement of the overdraft was agreed with Barclays. The remaining bills were all paid by the ongoing operating Football club whilst SLH was liquidated after it's assets were sold to ML. The £30m mortgage and overdraft debt was settled for an agreed payment. ML paid overall in the region of £14m to wipe the slate clean. So our financial settlement was nothing like any of the other clubs that had or didn't have CVAs where large debts to all except football debtors were written off. Edited 9 June, 2011 by derry Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jez Posted 9 June, 2011 Share Posted 9 June, 2011 and to think Deppo got banned for taking threads off topic. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
djharvey Posted 9 June, 2011 Share Posted 9 June, 2011 my memory recalled the same kind of figures, but a quick google confirmed it, http://www.dailyecho.co.uk/sport/4481187.Swiss_Saints_deal_completed/ Lol, there's no actual confirmed figures! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wildgoose Posted 9 June, 2011 Share Posted 9 June, 2011 Were the debts written off, or were they paid either in full or in part as final settlement? A director's loan to the club to pay off those debts would not make the club debt free, would it. It might be more true to say that the owners wish the club to operate as if it was debt free. Who really knows? I'm pretty sure I understood at the time that they were written off and the new club bought for 12m plus, without any debt. There's a good post from Derry on this thread to that effect. That's what I remember, and am pretty sure that it was not just rumour. If I get chance, I'll see if I can find the articles referring to it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
saintscottofthenortham Posted 9 June, 2011 Share Posted 9 June, 2011 Can you lot f*** off to a thread specific to your choice of subject!? Please. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
capitalsaint Posted 9 June, 2011 Share Posted 9 June, 2011 Can you lot f*** off to a thread specific to your choice of subject!? Please. Infraction. Abusive post unrelated to the original topic. Watch out sunshine. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Colinjb Posted 9 June, 2011 Share Posted 9 June, 2011 If you think it was right that we sacrificed our premier status just to make a point, then fine.As you were probably one of the vocal minority there are many that disagree with you. I am assuming you were one of the vocal minority by the tone of your writing. I think that significant occurances such as an established club's relegation from the premiership can never be solely defined by one choice alone. Considering as well that this was all happened well over seven years ago your ongoing fixation on Glenn Hoddle not returning amuses me greatly. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
doggface Posted 9 June, 2011 Share Posted 9 June, 2011 put a cork in it.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John B Posted 9 June, 2011 Share Posted 9 June, 2011 Has he signed yet? Does not appear so at the moment although he might have and SFC are keeping it secret. However I think some members of the U21 Squad are about to sign or have signed for PL sides which have paid a lot of money for them For instance http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/football/13713913.stm http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/football/13685517.stm Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
saintscottofthenortham Posted 9 June, 2011 Share Posted 9 June, 2011 Infraction. Abusive post unrelated to the original topic. Watch out sunshine. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pap Posted 9 June, 2011 Share Posted 9 June, 2011 Regarding the club's debt situation after the takeover. Markus has bought this with his own personal wealth so does that mean the club is completely debt free? The club is completely debt free. From the Thursday July 9th, 2009 edition of the Echo. I have the full interview on PDF if anyone is interested. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gemmel Posted 9 June, 2011 Share Posted 9 June, 2011 (edited) From the Thursday July 9th, 2009 edition of the Echo. I have the full interview on PDF if anyone is interested. We are in debt, I have the accounts if anyone is interested. But in a way it is irrelevant. It is the structure of the debt, the intent to call it in and the views of the family that count most. At this point in time, the investment from Markus is doing very nicely. Edited 9 June, 2011 by Gemmel Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ivan Katalinic's 'tache Posted 9 June, 2011 Share Posted 9 June, 2011 We are in debt, I have the accounts if anyone is interested. But in a way it is irrelevant. It is the structure of the debt, the intent to call it in and the views of the family that count most. At this point in time, the investment from Markus is doing very nicely. Nicely enough to afford Jack Cork's transfer fee and alleged salary? [did you see the way I tried to bring this thread back on topic but without losing the discussion which went before? Neat, huh?] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Crab Lungs Posted 9 June, 2011 Share Posted 9 June, 2011 It probably doesn't mean a thing, but Jack Cork's profile picture is of him at St.Mary's before the England game. I hope the content of the picture is a hint! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pilchards Posted 9 June, 2011 Share Posted 9 June, 2011 It probably doesn't mean a thing, but Jack Cork's profile picture is of him at St.Mary's before the England game. I hope the content of the picture is a hint! It does mean a lot because if you read what he put on his twitter comment on changing his photo. 'Me in my England kit which is in front of my new home, I will be in the Premiership next year and **** off you skates.' Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hypochondriac Posted 9 June, 2011 Share Posted 9 June, 2011 It does mean a lot because if you read what he put on his twitter comment on changing his photo. 'Me in my England kit which is in front of my new home, I will be in the Premiership next year and **** off you skates.' Serious? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hypochondriac Posted 9 June, 2011 Share Posted 9 June, 2011 Just occurred to me you were probably lying. Doh! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pilchards Posted 10 June, 2011 Share Posted 10 June, 2011 Just occurred to me you were probably lying. Doh! [Having a little giggle this morning on your behalf] If Carling did tweets then it would be like. :-) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Joneth Posted 10 June, 2011 Share Posted 10 June, 2011 If only Deppo was here to de-rail this thread. Really hope this transfer comes off, potentially the signing of the season. Cork is a class player and just what we need. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
paris Posted 10 June, 2011 Share Posted 10 June, 2011 Jack Cork.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ivan Katalinic's 'tache Posted 10 June, 2011 Share Posted 10 June, 2011 Jack Cork.... ....that's the fella. Got anything u'd like to share? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
S-Clarke Posted 10 June, 2011 Share Posted 10 June, 2011 This thread is going along the lines of the Austin and Mackail-Smith threads!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NickG Posted 10 June, 2011 Share Posted 10 June, 2011 clarets forum: Some players win you matches when they play well, others save you points. Yet others put bums on seats with thrilling skills. These players deserve top wages. Jack does none of them. He is neat and tidy but doesn't do enough of consequence where it matters. Better than marney or bartley but i think we can find more effective for less. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OVER THE HILL Posted 10 June, 2011 Share Posted 10 June, 2011 clarets forum: Some players win you matches when they play well, others save you points. Yet others put bums on seats with thrilling skills. These players deserve top wages. Jack does none of them. He is neat and tidy but doesn't do enough of consequence where it matters. I think this sums him up really well. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
St_Tel49 Posted 10 June, 2011 Share Posted 10 June, 2011 [Having a little giggle this morning on your behalf] If Carling did tweets then it would be like. :-) Carlsberg, old boy, Carlsberg Either way its cat's wee. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sotonist Posted 10 June, 2011 Share Posted 10 June, 2011 Your little black book of facts from where exactly! my maths book from school. there are probably books in which 15m is the majority of 32m, but i've not read any of those. If it was only Barclays and Aviva that had to settle for less, then the majority of the creditors were probably paid, but I've seen nothing to suggest that the majority of the debt was. Maybe it's on the final accounts of SLH but only accounts made up to 2008 are available from companies house. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SaintBobby Posted 10 June, 2011 Share Posted 10 June, 2011 I'm lost now. Does the historical debt, or lack of it, mean we can or can't, should or shouldn't, will or won't, sign Jack Cork? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
derry Posted 10 June, 2011 Share Posted 10 June, 2011 All SFC debts were paid. It is the holding company SLH that had debts. The Mortgage was settled as was the overdraft the rest of the debts were SFC operating, so were paid in full. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
derry Posted 10 June, 2011 Share Posted 10 June, 2011 I'm lost now. Does the historical debt, or lack of it, mean we can or can't, should or shouldn't, will or won't, sign Jack Cork? Who? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
djharvey Posted 10 June, 2011 Share Posted 10 June, 2011 my maths book from school. there are probably books in which 15m is the majority of 32m, but i've not read any of those. If it was only Barclays and Aviva that had to settle for less, then the majority of the creditors were probably paid, but I've seen nothing to suggest that the majority of the debt was. Maybe it's on the final accounts of SLH but only accounts made up to 2008 are available from companies house. So you are actually saying you dont have the factual figures! ie: you dont know! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
djharvey Posted 10 June, 2011 Share Posted 10 June, 2011 All SFC debts were paid. It is the holding company SLH that had debts. The Mortgage was settled as was the overdraft the rest of the debts were SFC operating, so were paid in full. We have a winner! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sotonist Posted 10 June, 2011 Share Posted 10 June, 2011 So you are actually saying you dont have the factual figures! ie: you dont know! I did begin the post with "I think", so i would have thought it was obvious that I didn't have exact figures. They were the broadly accepted conclusions at the time and there's no published figures to confirm or debunk them as far as I know. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now